The teen girl in the last photo looks so beautiful. Childhood mortality was so high back then. I guess these photos gave the families some closure.
If you find the original Reddit link, then please post it.
I’d heard of this practise but never actually seen any pictures. I think the creepy ones are the ones where the deceased is posed as if alive.
The others are okay though.
Amazing story. Thanks.
Reminds me of a certain scene in the Nicole Kidman movie “The Others.” If you’ve seen it then you know what I mean.
I’ve seen these before. They creep me the fuck out.
Actually, all old pictures creep me out.
Photographing the dead happens even now. My midwife friend had pictures of a full term stillborn baby on her phone. Creepy as all get out for me, but she took them for the family and explained that they were likely to be the only images of their baby that the parents would have and that they would probably want them one day when their grief was not so raw.
I’m feeling a little bit like I’m going to hell for my first thought about the third picture, “Aww, damn, the baby’s drunk again! Everybody act casual!”
Creepy and intriguing pics, though.
Me too. These pics give me the creeps like few things do.
I’ve seen some of those pictures before. They just make me sad. I feel so badly for the parents and families that might not have had any other pictures of that person and were obviously desperate to have something to remember their child or relative’s face. I feel especially bad for the little kids in the picture with their dead baby sibling – wondering if they had to pose for such a picture before, and if they had to again later. So sad. 
Ugh. I knew the Victorians liked death portraits, especially of children, but I’d only seen ones of children in coffins or posed to look like they were sleeping… never being held by family members or propped up as if alive.
I also just feel sad for the families. Look in the parents’s eyes and try to see what’s behind them.
It is depressing to think about what life was like for people back then. In this one, am I correct in thinking it looks like the adult woman’s eyes were painted on? I imagine that both mother and child probabyl died of some infectious illness. That’s so sad.
I’m very thankful for modern medicine and vaccinations. We are so lucky to live in an era where it’s not normal for children to die frequently, in contrast to most of humanity’s history.
Wait, the kids were alive? I thought everyone in the photos was dead.
Mortuary photos in coffins are one thing, but posing dead bodies like they’re still alive? That’s…fucked up.
That is too fucking creepy. shudder
I work with photos like these all the time.
A lot of people have full photo shoots with professional photographers, and with today’s cameras, it’s undeniably apparent the infants are dead. They get a little desiccated and their eyes start to fall in slightly. The skin is sometimes peeling a bit. The photos are often screen-filling close up shots of the face.
Sometimes, the parents are photographed with them, rarely nude. For some reason, pregnant women and new parents love getting naked for the camera. I’m guessing it’s some artsy stab at being deep or showing how organic they are. Or the woman just wants to flash her milk-sagging udders. In the dead-baby photos, this usually means they’ve got the tyke held strategically, though.
Some of the photos are not professional. They’re horribly-lit phone camera photos or what look like fuzzy mortuary photos due to the stark lighting and dark backgrounds. Some of them are of children that didn’t even reach full term. One featured the alien-like feet of a baby that had died early in the pregnancy.
Yeah, it’s unsettling. I don’t think I’ve ever gotten a photo of an adult or even older child corpse. It seems to be exclusively newborns.
Milk-sagging udders?
Are you referencing that scene from “Colors”?
In that one, I don’t think the mother was dead, just holding her dead child.
StG
There was one real advantage in photographing dead people – they kept still.
It sounds like a tasteless joke, but it’s true. Exposure times were much longer back then (photographers sometimes “tripped the shutter” by removing the lens cap and putting it back on). They had posing stands that could keep you still and steady through a long exposure. Kids were notoriously difficult to photograph.
Photography of the dead is only one aspect of Victorian response to high child mortality – they had memorial plaques, pictures made of hair of the deceased, memorial urns, songs, and suchlike. Photographs of dead children were just another aspect of this, facilitated by new technology.
I know one thing.
I ain’t clicking on the link.